More cuts are not the answer

Published: Monday, January 14, 2013 at 5:46 p.m.

Last Modified: Monday, January 14, 2013 at 5:46 p.m.

The state’s Terrebonne Parish office of Early Childhood Support and Services currently works with 109 local children.

There are another 150 families with children who have or are at risk of developing mental-health problems on the agency’s waiting list.

For all these children and their families, there is no help coming.

The state has cut the program entirely, sending out termination notices to the local employees and planning to close the agency by Feb. 1.

That is bad news for the people who use the service and for those who were waiting to do so. It is also, though, bad news for our society that a program like this can fall prey to the budget ax.

Not only is this state service a vital one for the present, it is also a useful, forward-looking approach to mental health.

“Everybody talks about the cycle of poverty,” said Dr. Valarie Johnston, a mental-health specialist at Tulane University School of Medicine. “Everybody points fingers at parents who have all these kids, and they don’t know what to do with them. And they end up on government assistance. And their kids have kids, and the cycle continues. That’s part of the cycle we are trying to interrupt. So every taxpayer should care about this.”

While taxpayers should care about the long-term effects of ending programs such as this that try to help children before mental-health issues can become larger problems, it is just another of the state’s short-sighted cuts to important programs.

Another was the recent announcement that terminally ill state Medicaid patients will no longer be afforded hospice care in their final days.

There is an argument to be made that there is only a finite number of dollars in the state’s budget. Because of the limits, the state must make difficult decision about what it can and cannot afford.

Informing those decisions, though, must be a determination about the long-term impacts these programs — or the lack thereof — will have on the state as a whole.

In the case of hospice care, there is some evidence to indicate the money spent there actually results in some savings over what the state will have to spend if those patients seek services at emergency rooms or in nursing homes.

In this case, too, there is reason to believe that short-term savings won’t necessarily be long-term benefits. If we stop helping youngsters who might have problems, we haven’t solved the problems — we’ve just made it more likely that those problems will manifest themselves in larger and more costly ways later on.

In a state facing financial difficulties, decisions must be made. Those decision makers, though, have to take a broader view. Otherwise, they are just delaying and possibly inflating the eventual costs.

<p>The state's Terrebonne Parish office of Early Childhood Support and Services currently works with 109 local children.</p><p>There are another 150 families with children who have or are at risk of developing mental-health problems on the agency's waiting list.</p><p>For all these children and their families, there is no help coming.</p><p>The state has cut the program entirely, sending out termination notices to the local employees and planning to close the agency by Feb. 1.</p><p>That is bad news for the people who use the service and for those who were waiting to do so. It is also, though, bad news for our society that a program like this can fall prey to the budget ax.</p><p>Not only is this state service a vital one for the present, it is also a useful, forward-looking approach to mental health.</p><p>“Everybody talks about the cycle of poverty,” said Dr. Valarie Johnston, a mental-health specialist at Tulane University School of Medicine. “Everybody points fingers at parents who have all these kids, and they don't know what to do with them. And they end up on government assistance. And their kids have kids, and the cycle continues. That's part of the cycle we are trying to interrupt. So every taxpayer should care about this.”</p><p>While taxpayers should care about the long-term effects of ending programs such as this that try to help children before mental-health issues can become larger problems, it is just another of the state's short-sighted cuts to important programs.</p><p>Another was the recent announcement that terminally ill state Medicaid patients will no longer be afforded hospice care in their final days.</p><p>There is an argument to be made that there is only a finite number of dollars in the state's budget. Because of the limits, the state must make difficult decision about what it can and cannot afford.</p><p>Informing those decisions, though, must be a determination about the long-term impacts these programs — or the lack thereof — will have on the state as a whole.</p><p>In the case of hospice care, there is some evidence to indicate the money spent there actually results in some savings over what the state will have to spend if those patients seek services at emergency rooms or in nursing homes.</p><p>In this case, too, there is reason to believe that short-term savings won't necessarily be long-term benefits. If we stop helping youngsters who might have problems, we haven't solved the problems — we've just made it more likely that those problems will manifest themselves in larger and more costly ways later on.</p><p>In a state facing financial difficulties, decisions must be made. Those decision makers, though, have to take a broader view. Otherwise, they are just delaying and possibly inflating the eventual costs.</p><p>Editorials represent the opinions of</p><p>the newspaper, not of any individual.</p>